Really? What about if they put on some really bright lights and zippy outdoors graphics? Would they be expedition campers then?
Give the guys some credit. They're a real, established company, and they appear to be focusing on the 4x4 market. If they don't belong in the same group as ER, Unicat, etc., it's about money and not substance. Change the section to "really expensive campers that have cachet" and be straightforward about it.
Hi Joaquin, I actually agree with you on the money part. I'm not the one who first mentioned the money. Money shouldn't have anything to do with the category. Tiger hasn't made any van based campers in a long time. The van campers they used to make simply do not have the suspension, frame, etc. to handle off road conditions. The ones that do have 4wd benefit from that when there is ice or snow on a paved road. They don't qualify as "expedition campers" because thay can't handle rough roads. You could paint them and put your bright lights on them and they still couldn't handle rough roads. The truck based CX and Bengal Tigers have reinforced frames to handle rough roads. Many of the 4wd units have suspension upgrades. These rough road capable truck based units do qualify as "Production Expedition Campers." If it's a production camper and it's capable of overlanding or at least handling rough roads, it ought to go in the same category as the others, regardless of what it cost.
Not all Sportsmobiles qualify as beling in the expedition camper section either. Some, though production models, are just overly tall limousines, 2wd vehicles with fancy seats, theatre, and a bar, correctly called touring vans. I suppose it would be splitting hairs in deciding which SMBs and Tigers to include and which to leave out???
